Effects of different pressure midfoot wraps on balance and proprioception in amateur basketball athletes

Abstract

Introduction: Ankle sprains are prevalent in basketball. This study sought to determine how midfoot wraps affect postural stability and ankle proprioception.

Methods: Twenty-two amateur basketball athletes performed three single-leg balance tests (static, head-elevated static, and unstable foam pad) under four wrap conditions (no wrap, low, medium, and high pressure), and balance measures were taken using a force platform. Standing time, center of pressure dynamics, surface electromyographic of the supporting leg musculature were recorded. Ankle proprioception joint position matching error was assessed by a digital inclinometer.

Results and discussion: Results indicated that during balance tests on foam padding, participants demonstrated significantly longer standing time when wearing low-pressure midfoot wraps, compared to high-pressure wraps (F (3,63) = 4.32, p = 0.008, η ² = 0.17). Wearing high-pressure wraps reduced anterior-posterior dynamic stability index variability (F (3,63) = 3.89, p = 0.044, η ² = 0.16), suggesting enhanced sagittal-plane control. Intriguingly, high-pressure conditions evidenced convergent activation trends between medial and lateral gastrocnemius (GM/GL ratio shift from 1.3 to 1.0), albeit without statistical significance (p > 0.05). No significant difference was detected in joint position sense in ankle dorsiflexion, plantarflexion, eversion and inversion between different wrap conditions (p > 0.05). These findings suggest that low-pressure midfoot wraps may improve balance through enhanced cutaneous feedback, while high-pressure wraps enhance anterior-posterior dynamic stability, providing biomechanically informed strategies for ankle injury prevention in basketball.

Keywords: balance; compression; electromyography; midfoot; proprioception.

FIGURE 1

Diagram of midfoot wraps (a), Ankle proprioception test (b), Single-leg standing with eyes closed (c), standing with head up and eyes closed (d), and standing on a foam pad with eyes closed (e).

FIGURE 2

Standing time of single-leg balance test. Bars indicate group means; error bars = SD. *Indicates significant, p < 0.05 (low-P vs. high-P). Static, Static (H), and Unstable represent the three types of single-leg balance tests (Static balance, Static balance [head elevated], Unstable surface). No-wrap, low-P, medium-P, and high-P refer to the four midfoot wrapping conditions (no-wrap, low-pressure, medium-pressure, high-pressure).

FIGURE 3

Maximum displacement and average velocity of the center of pressure during the single-leg balance test. Bars indicate group means; error bars = SD. (A–D) represent the maximum displacement and average velocity of the center of pressure in the medial-lateral and anterior-posterior directions, respectively. Static, Static (H), and Unstable represent the three types of single-leg balance tests (Static balance, Static balance [head elevated], Unstable surface). No-wrap, low-P, medium-P, and high-P refer to the four midfoot wrapping conditions (no-wrap, low-pressure, medium-pressure, high-pressure).

FIGURE 4

Changes in the contribution of GL and GM during the single-leg balance test. Solid and hollow dots both indicate group means, error bars = SD. No-wrap, low-P, medium-P, and high-P refer to the four midfoot wrapping conditions (no-wrap, low-pressure, medium-pressure, high-pressure). (A) Static balance; (B) Static balance (head elevated); (C) Unstable surface.

FIGURE 5

Differences in joint position senses for ankle dorsiflexion, plantarflexion, inversion, and eversion. Bars indicate group means; error bars = SD. No-wrap, low-P, medium-P, and high-P refer to the four midfoot wrapping conditions (no-wrap, low-pressure, medium-pressure, high-pressure).